We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

A success made by CCPIT representing our client in administrative appeal

Beijing High Court recently made a ruling in a patent invalidation administrative litigation [Judgment: (2014) Gao Xing Zhong Zi No.1198] to declare a patent invalid, by reversing the lower court’s ruling and affirming the Patent Reexamination Board (PRB)’s decision. Our firm represented the petitioner to request the invalidation of the patent and made a final success.

The success helps our client in the co-pending infringement litigation, and also in the related litigations in US. This case also has a great influence in the touch screen and smart phone industries, because the involved companies are all well-known in the industries.

The case involves a utility model patent titled “Touch Pattern of Capacitive Touch Panel”. The invalidation decision was made on the grounds of lacking novelty or inventive step. The focus of dispute is the claim interpretation. The lower court’s ruling [Judgment: (2013) Yi Zhong Xing Chu Zi No.3305] introduces contents not described in the claims or specification to limit the claim scope when interpreting the claims. The High Court’s ruling concludes that the way of interpretation by the lower court is wrong and should be corrected. The High Court’s judgment has a significance of guiding claim interpretation in future invalidation cases.

Compare jurisdictions: Arbitration

"Lexology is one of the few newsfeeds that I do actually look over as and when it comes in - the information is current; has good descriptive headings so I can see quickly what the articles relate to and is not too long."